Architecture and Public Policy

Related Topics

CIS explores how changes in the architecture of computer networks affect the economic environment for innovation and competition on the Internet, and how the law should react to those changes. This work has lead us to analyze the issue of network neutrality, perhaps the Internet's most debated policy issue, which concerns Internet user's ability to access the content and software of their choice without interference from network providers.

Professor of Law and Helen L. Crocker Faculty Scholar at Stanford Law School, Director of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, and Associate Professor (by courtesy) of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University

Barbara van Schewick is a Professor of Law and Helen L. Crocker Faculty Scholar at Stanford Law School, Director of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, Associate Professor (by courtesy) of Electrical Engineering in Stanford University’s Department of Electrical Engineering, and a leading expert on net neutrality.

Paddy Leerssen is the Open Internet Fellow at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society. His work focuses on digital media and communications law, with a particular emphasis on net neutrality policy. He previously held positions at the Harvard University’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, the University of Amsterdam’s Institute for Information Law (IViR), and the non-governmental organization European Digital Rights (EDRi).

Marvin Ammori is a leading First Amendment lawyer and Internet policy expert. He was instrumental to the adoption of network neutrality rules in the US and abroad–having been perhaps the nation’s leading legal advocate advancing network neutrality–and also instrumental to the defeat of the SOPA and PIPA copyright/censorship bills.

Emily Baxter is a research associate for Women's Economic Policy at the Center for American Progress, focusing on women's and families' economic security, women's leadership, and work-family balance. She previously worked as the special assistant for the Faith and Progressive Policy Initiative at the Center. In the fall of 2012, Emily was a field organizer for President Obama’s re-election campaign near her hometown of Erie, Pennsylvania.

The essay below serves as introduction to the Stanford Center for Internet and Society's Law, Borders, and Speech Conference Proceedings Volume. The conference brought together experts from around the world to discuss conflicting national laws governing online speech -- and how courts, Internet platforms, and public interest advocates should respond to increasing demands for these laws to be enforced on the global Internet.

Today, someone asked me about the Internet and human well-being over the next decade. The question was a healthy provocation to look at the big picture. I chose “more helped than harmed” from the very short list of radio-button responses. Here’s my elaboration:

Today the FCC Commissioners voted 3-2 to eliminate longstanding net neutrality protections, reclassify internet service providers as ‘information services’ under Title I of the Communications Act, and ban states from enacting their own net neutrality protections.

Although much work has been done on applying the law of warfare to cyber attacks, far less attention has been paid to defining a law of cyber peace applicable below the armed attack threshold. Among the most important unanswered questions is what exactly nations’ due diligence obligations are to one another and to the private sector, as well as how these obligations should be translated into policy.

Pages

Comcast Corp. v. FCC is a 2010 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia case holding that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not have ancillary jurisdiction over Comcast’s Internet service under the language of the Communications Act of 1934. In so holding, the Court vacated a 2008 order issued by the FCC that asserted jurisdiction over Comcast’s network management polices and censured Comcast from interfering with its subscribers' use of peer-to-peer software.

In 2005, on the same day the FCC re-classified DSL service and effectively reduced the regulatory obligations of DSL providers, the FCC announced its unanimous view that consumers are entitled to certain rights and expectations with respect to their broadband service, including the right to:

"“The Congress that tried to destroy net neutrality once would only weaken it with legislation that fails to adequately protect those it is meant to serve,” says Malkia Cyril, the executive director of the Center for Media Justice. She noted that the civil rights groups that signed the letter are now calling for putting the future of the internet “into the hands of a GOP Congress that just appointed white supremacist Jeff Sessions to be attorney general.”"

"But standing up to a president also carries risks, especially for publicly traded companies, which face a legal obligation to put profit ahead of protest. “For companies that are acting in their self-interest, the process is sitting down and looking at this matrix, and trying to figure out how to be effective,” says Andrew McLaughlin, a venture partner at Betaworks and deputy chief technology officer of the United States under President Obama."

"The upcoming letter will be another show of unity for the industry, said Andrew Bridges, a lawyer at Fenwick & West who is not involved in the drafting of the letter but has worked with many of the same companies on unrelated matters. "My fear is that the ban, both literally and secondarily as a reflection of broader policies, is going to threaten the American economy in the most fundamental way," Bridges said, adding that given Trump's recent proposals, "Why would any global company want to have its headquarters in the U.S.?""

""During his tenure, despite industry roots, Wheeler proved to be a leader who heeded democracy's call," said Malkia Cyril, executive director at the Center for Media Justice. "Wheeler was a chairman willing to act in defense of the public interest, and in defiance of industry pressure and partisan politics."

Pages

ACS, The Center on the Legal Profession, and The Center for Internet and Society are pleased to welcome Valarie Kaur to lead a discussion of storytelling, media, and the law. We will screen Kaur's film Alienation and Kaur will lead a discussion of the film and her approach to telling legal stories in the public sphere.

On Wednesday, May 7th at 6:30 p.m. EST, Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.) will host a panel discussion on recently proposed net neutrality rules from the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. The panel, moderated by Cecilia Kang of the Washington Post, will include:

The Internet makes lives better, around the world, in ways people couldn't have imagined not even a decade ago. It sparks prosperity, inspires dissent, improves education, and encourages freedom. But all of the good it does is under threat, largely from governments.

Please visit Eventbrite for more information and to purchase tickets for this event.

Strategy TNT: Margaret Hagan

Law is an area that's largely untouched by creative thinking & good design. But there's huge potential here -- to use design to make the legal system more empowering, and to make people more in control of their legal situation.

"Veronica B.: Look at it this way. Imagine Amazon started a larva farm too, and they could pay for faster internet speeds, get on an internet fast lane, and advertise to their customers in a way that Patrick or any startup bug business couldn’t. See the problem? Okay, the edible bug-growing business might not be a priority for Amazon at the moment, but did you think Amazon would ever buy a grocery chain until they bought wholefoods? 10 years ago, did you think Google would get into self-driving cars?

This week on CounterSpin: FCC chair Ajit Pai has announced his plans to gut net neutrality; the former Verizon lawyer and Jeff Sessions staffer declared his intentions at a private event in DC. So the victory activists fought for—having broadband recognized as a public utility like the telephone, and not some sort of corporate gift—is in jeopardy. What does this mean for all of us who rely on an open internet, and in particular for communities of color, for whom the web’s relatively even playing field is crucial for communication and organizing?

In 2013, Elon Musk proposed an "open source transportation concept" of levitating vehicles zooming passengers through vacuum tubes at 760 miles an hour. It would be weatherproof, energy-efficient, relatively inexpensive, have autonomous controls. Its impact on urban and inter-city transport could reshape economies and families.